I responded to your patronizing and condescending tone. If you want a civil debate, make an rational argument.
When you write: "I've been there myself, it takes a lot of time and effort to understand the real impact of something that doesn't impact yourself." Isn't that the most condescending thing you could write to someone else? You're implying that because I don't share your opinion I must have not thought hard enough about the issue. "Please teach me your ways so that I too may be as enlightened as you".
>you don't even seem to think that maybe you don't know, that there are different ways to voice and interpret messages.
Do you? Are you maybe wrong about how you see the world?
Honestly, you're lecturing me but you cannot even fathom the idea that you may be completely wrong about this ... because you took time and effort to really really really think about it and you finally figured it all out.
Urgh.
>I'm explaining that perhaps you can't comprehend why people act in a certain manner because you're not in their place
Does a gay black woman know the experience of straight white man? Or a recent immigrant from China? Or a rural farmer? Or black executive from Wall Street?
Democracy is based on the idea that we collectively make decisions that then apply collectively. You're saying that a gay black woman cannot comprehend the experience of white, straight men so she shouldn't engage in policy debates that affect them? Are you seriously making that kind of an argument?
So you're either making a meaningless pointless statement that implies nobody knows anybody's experience, or you're saying I don't have empathy or the ability to reason. Which is it?